Graeme

That's why CJ uses a zeta-reader -- to pick up continuity errors like that Oh, and it was Eric that bought the GPS, not Jon. Jon bought the camera Back to the story, I've noticed that the other guys have come to rely on Brandon whenever they need something practical done, or to put a bit of common-sense into the situation. Brandon hasn't commented on it yet, but does anyone think it'll eventually get to the point where he blows up at Jon and Eric and tells them to do something for themselves? While they are better now, Jon and Eric have past form with taking advantage of others (look at how they tried to get out of Charity's blackmail, and earlier when Chase decided to practise his drums in their room after a heavy night of drinking....)

Okay, since you asked so nicely.... Chapter 28 contains lots of words. One of those words is "sex". Another is "Brandon" and another is "Chase". I know that might be considered a spoiler, but since I appear to be the final arbitrator on that subject, I think I'll let myself get away with it :mace:

And as a beta-reader, I read chapter 28 last night... Being a beta-reader is one of the reasons I'm not posting as much as I used to. I have future story information now and I don't want to post something that might inadvertently reveal something in a future chapter. But back on the subject of the GPS, even if he remembers the exact model, we would need to know the popularity of that model to know if it is damning evidence against Chase. If it didn't sell a lot (or if it isn't sold in Australia), then it would be a very strong pointer to Instinct. On the other hand, if it was a very popular model, it wouldn't be as strong indicator. The Scar would still be suspicious, but he appears to need Instinct as a cover for transporting the bombs, and he won't jeopardise that on just a suspicion.

Heath Ledger died of accidental drug overdose from Melbourne's Herald Sun. I found the headline misleading -- it doesn't appear, from my reading, that he died of a drug overdose, but instead died from a fatal drug interaction. Drug interactions kill a number of people each year, and it is one of the key areas in drug dispensing (and why doctors and pharmicists ask what other medication you're on). Ledger's US-based publicist, Mara Buxbaum, immediately released a statement from Ledger's father, Kim, requesting the media to stop speculating about what killed his son. "Today's results put an end to speculation, but our son's beautiful spirit and enduring memory will forever remain in our hearts,'' Kim Ledger wrote. "While no medications were taken in excess, we learned today the combination of doctor-prescribed drugs proved lethal for our boy. "Heath's accidental death serves as a caution to the hidden dangers of combining prescription medication, even at low dosage.''

Unless the GPS was engraved or a really unusual model, all it would tell The Scar is that it was the same model that Jerry helped him pick out. Given that that was a month or more go (they have finished their European tour in the meantime), The Scar will probably be uncertain as to the exact model he helped them pick out (I know I couldn't remember the exact model of something I saw only once a month or more earlier), though Jerry did know something about GPS systems, since he directed Eric away from the poorer model the salesman was originally trying to sell him, so it's possible. It will raise his suspicions, and he may ask Chase if he could "borrow" his GPS as a way of checking to see if Chase still has is, but it's certainly not conclusive evidence against the boys. Strong evidence, but not conclusive.

I don't think the words have less meaning from being said often. I think it is more that they have less meaning from being said inappropriately. When you are just starting out in a relationship, it is more likely to be infatuation than love, and saying "I love you" at that point weakens the meaning, as the other person will be wondering how easy it must be for you to fall in love (and maybe fall out of love). On the other hand, after being in a relationship for a few years, "I love you" really means what it says and it is a reinforcement of what you feel, and the other person will recognise that. My opinion only, as someone who is slow to say "I love you" because I said it too early once It delayed a relationship because it made the other person to back off (they didn't see how I could "love" them since we'd only known each other for a short time).

Given that many of the stories that I really enjoy don't involve a lot of sex, the genders of the participants isn't a big deal. There is certainly an element where I can relate better, or appreciate better, when the couple are both guys, but the good stories involve a lot more than just a relationship. The stories are often (though not always -- coming out stories, for example) easily translated into a hetereosexual story, if desired. Indeed, some of the great characters I can remember in stories are straight....

Commerical car washes that recycle their water are still permitted. Indeed, their business has picked up during the drought because water restrictions mean people aren't washing their cars at home. I saw that, but I also noticed that they aren't going to do that until they're back in the USA, so it's a long way down the track. There's one thing that I'm not sure about -- is the Range Rover a hire vehicle or owned by The Scar? If it's the former, then Jerry may not return to the resort with it, especially as the guys won't be staying there. He may return the hire vehicle, fly to wherever he needs to go next (such as Perth for the next concert) and then hire a new car when he's next in Brisbane. Which has the lowest security risk? It's a toss up, but I suspect he owns the vehicle, since he's got to do a lot of traveling in the area. A paper trail of hire vehicles, even if they are in fictitious names, would be the greater risk, I think.

I loved the irony in the opening exchange, especially Jerry saying (about Vlad) "I

Thanks for the link, Jack! I found it interesting that something violates the obscenity law only if it is displayed for commercial purposes. I would argue that "art" being on display in a commercial premise is not for commercial purposes as they are not advertising A&F products. I would also suggest that any art gallery or museum that charges for admission and has something like this on display would be at risk of being guilty (since the "art" is being displayed for a commercial purpose -- that of attracting people to come to see them at the museum).

Not surprising, but good news. You can never underestimate the stupidity of some people -- they just might have tried to carry through because they refused to admit that they overreacted.

I'd go as far as loving his son.... There's something about Joe that makes me want to make him better again. Maybe I'm getting confused with our own GA Joe (JSmith).... However, I think we're getting off topic. This is the thread for saving Eric

I don't shop there, either, but that's for two reasons. The first is I've never seen them in Australia and the second is that the one time I went into one in the USA, fully prepared to pay through the nose for something good, they didn't have anything that fitted my... er... well... body shape It seems that they assume that everyone has a good physique to start with....

Obscenity is a subjective thing. The picture shown, and the other one described, depict a portion of the human body which is normally not displayed. The question is whether the display of any part of those portions of anatomy are obscene, or only certain sections. Using the second picture as an example, is it just the nipple of a female breast that is obscene to be displayed, or can other parts of the breast be considered obscene if on display? I suspect the case will hinge on this subject, and if they rule against the manager, you can expect a lot of other similar cases being brought (eg. lingere pictures in department stores). Personally, I thought that that photo was slightly risque, but definitely not obscene.

That's possibly, but I suspect it's untrue. There will be another person who knows how you voted (unless you've already forgotten ) Seriously, I suspect it will be a close vote, so if you have your preferences, please vote before the deadline

I'm not sure I'll vote because I've never tried to "define" my moral code. Like Robbie, I believe I'm a mixture of utilitarianism and relativism, though with a light seasoning of divine command. The later is because I recognise that the moral code of the society I live in is heavily influenced by the Judea-Christian ethos, and hence the commands "Thou Shalt Not Murder" and "Thou Shalt Not Steal" are a grey area as to relativism or divine command. Intents and consequences both need to be balanced when considering a course of action. Doing the greatest good is also important. I personally find the saying "The means justifies the end" to be false. Both the means and the end are important and need to be considered when trying to determine the morality of an action. A great thread, Razor

Valentine's Day is a special day for a birthday. The Calendar (on the menu at the top right of the screen) shows four members with Feb 14th as their birthday. I also know some one whose anniversary is two days before Valentine's Day. They've got it well organised -- one member of the couple is responsible for the anniversary celebration and the other is responsible for the Valentine's Day celebration, alternating each year. Does anyone else know of someone who has a special/appropriate day on or around Valentine's Day?

That sounds like The Scar is going to buying Eric some drinks.... Will it be anything more than that, though? CJ is notorious about having non-obvious chapter title interpretations.

You may be too young for this but a good kids playground can be a lot of fun. This would be something in conjunction with some of the other ideas (like biking, picnic, a stroll through a park, by a lake, etc). Good luck!

Happy 20th Birthday! Another member of the ex-teenager brigade

Let's see... Brandon and Chase end up hiding out on a remote, but extremely well equipped, private island in the Great Barrier Reef. Barbra and Helen hide in plain sight in the shopping centres of Sydney. Gunter returns to Rome. Jon is transferred to a farm just outside Melbourne where he starts teaching two young lads how to play musical instruments, before pleading he'd rather do anything else. And Eric... is seconded in ShadowGod's home and told he's never allowed to leave I think that's everyone 'disappeared'

I was wondering if anyone would pick up the reference Yes, I've been a Robert Heinlein fan in the past. The Moon Is A Harsh Mistress is one of my favourites (which is where the word comes from ). As for the section you quoted, it makes it almost certain that it is Instinct that is to be... er... terminated with extreme prejudice. Maybe Shadowgod can put in a counter offer and see if his bid for the work is lower that Mario's?

You think so? Maybe I'll try to whip something up for the next anthology... I think silly season has arrived As is not too uncommon, I appear to have started it.... Anyone willing to try to steer this thread back into a sensible discussion on chapter 24?

"Ah, Mr. Shadowgod, we've received your latest bill. I'm afraid there's a problem with paying it." "Why?" "You see, you've charged us for Mr. C and Mr. J. We only wanted Mr. C killed. We just can't pay for the extra death that resulted. "How was I supposed to kill one and not the other? They're conjoined twins, for God's sake!" "That wasn't our problem. We had a deal and you've failed to live up to your side. We just can't pay the account you've submit." "In that case, TANSTAAFL!" The bomb embedded in the accountants phone, keyed to explode when the key word was uttered, killed five people. Shadowgod sent himself the bill and promptly paid it. It is, after all, important to pay these sorts of things on time and not to quibble about details....

Welcome, Ty4650! Like you, I think it'll be Instinct who are to be killed. Once they've been used to smuggle the bombs into the USA (which appears to be the plan, though that is still, I think, an assumption), The Scar may not need them anymore. Shadowgod, you are assuming payment is per person, not per incident. I would think that a single task that kills one person would be charged the same as that same task that kills ten. Mario will be paid to do a task, not on a body-count basis. That's what I think....